Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Ethyl Corporation v. Environmental Protection Agency

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
541 F.2d 1 (1976)


Facts

The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970, 42 U.S.C. § 7401, gave the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (defendant) authority to protect public health by regulating fuel additives that produced dangerous emissions. The EPA sought to address health concerns relating to lead emissions from leaded fuel. Pursuant to the requirements for informal rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. § 553, the EPA gave notice of its intent to propose rules relating to lead fuel additives, then promulgated proposed regulations for public comment. In 1973, the EPA published final regulations for lead emissions, together with data and research in support of the regulations. The APA provides standards for judicial review of a government agency’s actions in § 706(2)(A), permitting a reviewing court to set aside agency actions, findings, or conclusions if found to be arbitrary or capricious. The Ethyl Corp. (Ethyl) and other lead-additive producers (plaintiffs) appealed the EPA’s emissions regulations to the United States Court of Appeals for the District Columbia Circuit, arguing, among other things, that the EPA’s emissions regulations were arbitrary and capricious. The court found in favor of Ethyl and set aside the regulations. The EPA petitioned for, and was granted, a rehearing en banc by the court, vacating the prior judgment.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Wright, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Concurrence (Leventhal, J.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Concurrence (Bazelon, C.J.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Dissent (Wilkey, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 217,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.